About Me

Tuesday, March 03, 2015

I just realized that there are at least 18 articles and reports attacking the famous Dr. Willie Soon, a Malaysian-American scientist at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, in late February 2015 alone. Heartland Institute put a section about Willie alone, https://www.heartland.org/willie-soon. The various articles attacking him, and articles defending him, are posted there.

Yesterday, Willie replied, posted in WUWT, and I am reposting it below.

Willie is a cool guy, I have met him twice, in NYC in 2009 and in Chicago in 2010, during the Heartland's 2nd and 4th ICCC, respectively. Our photo in 2009. From left: Barun Mitra (India), Willie, Jose Tapia (Peru), me. We were the very few non-Caucasian guys in that conference.

-------------

In recent weeks I have been the target of attacks in the
press by various radical environmental and politically motivated groups. This
effort should be seen for what it is: a shameless attempt to silence my
scientific research and writings, and to make an example out of me as a warning
to any other researcher who may dare question in the slightest their fervently
held orthodoxy of anthropogenic global warming.

I am saddened and appalled by this effort, not only
because of the personal hurt it causes me and my family and friends, but also
because of the damage it does to the integrity of the scientific process. I am
willing to debate the substance of my research and competing views of climate
change with anyone, anytime, anywhere. It is a shame that those who disagree
with me resolutely decline all public debate and stoop instead to underhanded
and unscientific ad hominem tactics.

Let me be clear. I have never been motivated by
financial gain to write any scientific paper, nor have I ever hidden grants or
any other alleged conflict of interest. I have been a solar and stellar
physicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics for a quarter of a
century, during which time I have published numerous peer-reviewed, scholarly
articles. The fact that my research has been supported in part by donations to
the Smithsonian Institution from many sources, including some energy producers,
has long been a matter of public record. In submitting my academic writings I
have always complied with what I understood to be disclosure practices in my
field generally, consistent with the level of disclosure made by many of my
Smithsonian colleagues.

If the standards for disclosure are to change, then let
them change evenly. If a journal that has peer-reviewed and published my work
concludes that additional disclosures are appropriate, I am happy to comply. I
would ask only that other authors-on all sides of the debate-are also required
to make similar disclosures. And I call on the media outlets that have so
quickly repeated my attackers’ accusations to similarly look into the
motivations of and disclosures that may or may not have been made by their
preferred, IPCC-linked scientists.

I regret deeply that the attacks on me now appear to have
spilled over onto other scientists who have dared to question the degree to
which human activities might be causing dangerous global warming, a topic that
ought rightly be the subject of rigorous open debate, not personal attack. I
similarly regret the terrible message this pillorying sends young researchers
about the costs of questioning widely accepted “truths.”

Finally, I thank all my many colleagues and friends who
have bravely objected to this smear campaign on my behalf and I challenge all
parties involved to focus on real scientific issues for the betterment of
humanity.